IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

[hdeasy]

I couldn't wade through the verbose exposition - reminds me of something from Bergson or Alfred Whitehead. Can you not summarize it in 2 or 3 sentences? The springs remind one of what is a truly reaction-less system - i.e.  http://www.inertialpropulsion.com/ .
Nothing like it thoguh, is it?

[George1]

Hi hdeasy,
Is there any friction between this machine and the horizontal surface?
George

[George1]

As if some four small wheels maintain the horizontal motion?

[hdeasy]

Do you mean Steve's demo of his cart moving? Well some friction is there between wheels and surface but he maintains that a reaction-less force moves it forward without contact to the axle of the wheels. However, the movement is a bit jerky, which could be that he's using one way wheels. In this case the system would be reaction off the floor.

[tinu]

Hi tinu,
Thank you for reply.
1) First of all it's evident that there is some kind of misunderstanding here. Nobody ever mentioned about zero-mass balls. The mass of each blue ball is, let's say, 1/100 the mass of the T-shaped blue component.
2) Your laser-based idea seems to be interesting. But how will you imitate the "ball+rod united whole" back-and-forth motion by using laser beams? We cannot understand this. It seems to be incompatible with our basic concept. Please explain your point of view in detail, if possible.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
     

Hi George1,

1. Nobody ever mentioned about zero-mass balls?!!! https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf Page 3, in the brackets: "For easier considerations further in the text you could assume that the masses of the two symmetrical couples blue rods - blue balls are equal to zero and can be neglected".  So, it seems the whole paper was written by somebody else, someone not part of 'your team', since you don't even remember what's about? I've only red it once, almost 4 months ago  and still remember what's written within while you obviously don't know it even at this time...
So, who actually wrote the paper? Please tell him/her/them, that the paper is plain wrong (starting with page 8 ) and please forward to him/her/them my previous post of January 6th.

2. You absolutely need a blue laser, since the rods and balls are blue in the concept paper you posted. Otherwise, the whole experiment might fail. In fact, I'm pretty sure it will fail. So, if you don't have a blue laser to emit blue photons acting as blue balls, you may quickly rewrite the paper according to the laser wavelength you have available, in an attempt to save the situation.  For instance, you may try red rods and red balls, if you have a red laser readily available. Yes, it seems my idea is hard to understood, isn't it? I'm glad you find it interesting, tough.
Point 2 was a joke, obviously, for those wandering. But since we're wasting time here, why not?

Best regards.